Graham
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
:laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Now you've made my head hurt I'm going home!
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians. Help end the violence EAT BACON
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Indeed, and so much more interesting than ∞. :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
The TREE sequence begins TREE(1) = 1, TREE(2) = 3, then suddenly TREE(3) explodes to a value so enormously large that many other "large" combinatorial constants, such as Friedman's n(4),[*] are extremely small by comparison.[1] A lower bound for n(4), and hence an extremely weak lower bound for TREE(3), is A(A(...A(1)...)), where the number of As is A(187196),[2] and A() is a version of Ackermann's function: A(x) = 2 [x + 1] x in hyperoperation. Graham's number, for example, is approximately A^64(4) which is much smaller than the lower bound A^A(187196)(1). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruskal%27s_tree_theorem#Friedman.27s_finite_form[^] I think it's time that we all went home...
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
That's crackers.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Indeed, and so much more interesting than ∞. :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
All natural integers are interesting. (The proof is left as an exercise for the student)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
The TREE sequence begins TREE(1) = 1, TREE(2) = 3, then suddenly TREE(3) explodes to a value so enormously large that many other "large" combinatorial constants, such as Friedman's n(4),[*] are extremely small by comparison.[1] A lower bound for n(4), and hence an extremely weak lower bound for TREE(3), is A(A(...A(1)...)), where the number of As is A(187196),[2] and A() is a version of Ackermann's function: A(x) = 2 [x + 1] x in hyperoperation. Graham's number, for example, is approximately A^64(4) which is much smaller than the lower bound A^A(187196)(1). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruskal%27s_tree_theorem#Friedman.27s_finite_form[^] I think it's time that we all went home...
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
I think it's time that we all went home...
Apart from those of us who work from home, who should all go down the pub. :rolleyes:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
I think it's time that we all went home...
Apart from those of us who work from home, who should all go down the pub. :rolleyes:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
So the U.S. debt is trying to surpass Graham's number?
Mongo: Mongo only pawn... in game of life.
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Any mathematicians in the crowd are watching the children play with matches.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
The TREE sequence begins TREE(1) = 1, TREE(2) = 3, then suddenly TREE(3) explodes to a value so enormously large that many other "large" combinatorial constants, such as Friedman's n(4),[*] are extremely small by comparison.[1] A lower bound for n(4), and hence an extremely weak lower bound for TREE(3), is A(A(...A(1)...)), where the number of As is A(187196),[2] and A() is a version of Ackermann's function: A(x) = 2 [x + 1] x in hyperoperation. Graham's number, for example, is approximately A^64(4) which is much smaller than the lower bound A^A(187196)(1). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruskal%27s_tree_theorem#Friedman.27s_finite_form[^] I think it's time that we all went home...
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Can you spell that sequence using only A, C, G, and T? :laugh:
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
Yes, but the representation is too large to fit in the margins of Code Project :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Any mathematicians in the crowd are watching the children play with matches.
Software Zen:
delete this;Gary Wheeler wrote:
Any mathematicians in the crowd are watching the children play with matches.
For my next act, I will wrassle a bear, make peace with a feral Chtorran, and divide by zero! [Bonus points for identifying the references]
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
Any mathematicians in the crowd are watching the children play with matches.
For my next act, I will wrassle a bear, make peace with a feral Chtorran, and divide by zero! [Bonus points for identifying the references]
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Because all smaller numbers are irrelevant. ;P Graham's number[^] From 1,000,000 to Graham’s Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I think this is how mathematicians and astrophysists play "Mine's bigger than yours" :laugh:
-
"Then for my first encore, I drink a whole bottle of trans-Lunar brandy, make love to a feral Chtorran, and kill a Martian woman-I think. Or maybe it's the other way around." David Gerrold in The Voyage of the Star Wolf. :)
Correct!
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Yes, but the representation is too large to fit in the margins of Code Project :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
